Retire a figure!

[Shonisaurus]

Honestly, I would like you to remove Schleich's therizinosaurus. I know it is asking a lot but that figure does not represent the beauty of strange and mysterious theropod. It is not well finished. On the other hand I would like from Schleich an updated and well-developed version of the giganotosaurus. The one that is currently commercialized does not convince me.

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

Why would anyone want any model retired, unless retiring it guarantees something better comes along? It just makes everything harder to get. No matter how hideous a model is, someone somewhere will probably want it. Unless the model is somehow an anti-science statement or something.

[Shonisaurus]

Obviously who sends when removing a dinosaur figure or another toy prehistoric animal is the consumer and in this case are the children and in some way the parents of children who are the main consumers of toy dinosaur brands. In this case we are formulating a wish but obviously we can not force a company to remove a prehistoric toy animal that obviously can give much hope to the youngest and that can be a sales success even if collectors never understand it.

For example, Collecta's two spinosaurs, which were prizes from the prestigious Prehistoric Times magazine along with Doug's sauropelta, were discontinued and Papo's tupuxuara, which was a small work of art, was discontinued. The reason that these figures are removed is not that they are bad figures or mediocre in their case, the problem is that sales were much lower than expected. On the other hand there are figures of dinosaurs that do not look good to us and that are repainted like the therizinosaurus and giganotosaurus of Schleich but that have a lot of acceptance among consumers in general and most importantly the children's audience that is the boss.

[tanystropheus]

Why would anyone want any model retired, unless retiring it guarantees something better comes along? It just makes everything harder to get. No matter how hideous a model is, someone somewhere will probably want it. Unless the model is somehow an anti-science statement or something.

How about the Schleich Ceratosaurus?

[Patrx]

Why would anyone want any model retired, unless retiring it guarantees something better comes along? It just makes everything harder to get. No matter how hideous a model is, someone somewhere will probably want it. Unless the model is somehow an anti-science statement or something.

How about the Schleich Ceratosaurus?

You mean you're not interested in collecting a toy theropod that looks like it was sculpted out of leftover meatloaf? 

[CityRaptor]

Someone on Amazon Germany actually gave it a positive review. Could be worse, at least it does not look like it was made out of poop like their original Carnotaurus.

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

Why would anyone want any model retired, unless retiring it guarantees something better comes along? It just makes everything harder to get. No matter how hideous a model is, someone somewhere will probably want it. Unless the model is somehow an anti-science statement or something.

How about the Schleich Ceratosaurus?

I'm sure some one out there thinks it is more beautiful than a summer sun.

[Roselaar]

Has that ugly old Safari Quetzalcoatlus with its weird tongue been retired yet? If not, now would be a good time to do so...

[Daspletodave]

Toys get retired when they stop selling well.  Period.

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

Why would anyone want any model retired, unless retiring it guarantees something better comes along? It just makes everything harder to get. No matter how hideous a model is, someone somewhere will probably want it. Unless the model is somehow an anti-science statement or something.

How about the Schleich Ceratosaurus?

On a more serious note, the sort of thing I mean is the Rebor "Yutyrannus" - that is anti-science.

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

Toys get retired when they stop selling well.  Period.

Everyone should buy a dozen of each Hadrosaur figure/toy every year then, that should keep them in circulation.

[Halichoeres]

Has that ugly old Safari Quetzalcoatlus with its weird tongue been retired yet? If not, now would be a good time to do so...

Thankfully, yes, one of the more welcome casualties of the end of the Carnegie line. Now it's Doug's very nice replacement.

[TheBlueEyedFox]

not necessarily retire, but make a non-JP style feathered or non-feathered Tyrannosaurus rex by Papo. also their Triceratops should be remade or make a non-JPesque one. Safari Ltd should retire their old Allosaurus and Stegosaurus and make new ones, they also should make a new Styracosaurus. i will add more when i remember which ones should be retired/remade

I know this is old, but just recently it has been established the T-rex was entirely featherless.  And this isn't a matter of opinion, JP's T-Rex is probably the most scientifically accurate depiction with the exception of its pronated hands.  Everything from the skin, forward facing, binocular eyes, and over-all proportions is spot on.  Mind you this was at a time Paleontologists did NOT know the T-rex had binocular eyes and so was namely depicted with eyes on the sides of its head. 

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

not necessarily retire, but make a non-JP style feathered or non-feathered Tyrannosaurus rex by Papo. also their Triceratops should be remade or make a non-JPesque one. Safari Ltd should retire their old Allosaurus and Stegosaurus and make new ones, they also should make a new Styracosaurus. i will add more when i remember which ones should be retired/remade

I know this is old, but just recently it has been established the T-rex was entirely featherless.  And this isn't a matter of opinion, JP's T-Rex is probably the most scientifically accurate depiction with the exception of its pronated hands.  Everything from the skin, forward facing, binocular eyes, and over-all proportions is spot on.  Mind you this was at a time Paleontologists did NOT know the T-rex had binocular eyes and so was namely depicted with eyes on the sides of its head.

Ahem, it has not been established that T. rex was entirely featherless. All that has been proven is that several small areas of the Tyrannosaurus are unfeathered, not the whole animal.

[Ravonium]

Even if T. rex was undoubtedly featherless, the JP rendition is definitely not the most accurate reconstruction of T. rex ever made. Yes, it's alright in terms of basic proportions, but a lot of finer details are incorrect

For example, the head has a lot of issues, the most glaring of which is that the front of the snout is too blunt and wide in comparison to what T .rex actually looked like. This gives the head a boxy appearance, making it look too short. The eyes are too much to the side to be considered accurate. There's also the more nitpicky issue of the nostrils being placed incorrectly; more specifically too far up the snout. A common point made against the head is there is no evidence that it had those brow-like structures on its head. While this is true, as the skull doesn't have these structures, there is not reason to not think that it might have had similar structures of a fleshy nature. Nevertheless, it contributes to the head's boxiness, and makes it look shrink-wrapped.

That's just the head though, there are a few issues with the rest of the body too. The torso is too gracile; the gastralia of Sue suggest that T. rex had a barrel-shaped figure, making T. rex look more 'beefy' than most reconstructions portray it as, and the arms are not only pronated, but they're also too long.


*Further reading*

Two excellent examples of T. rex reconstructions that manage to be more accurate than the JP Rex while being unfeathered:

EDIT: The previous link was dead, so I'll put this here instead: https://www.deviantart.com/ilyayungin1991/art/Tyrannosaurus-656911839

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/598d04984c0dbf67c441eb69/t/5bf2582070a6ad8a5c90788d/1542609006275/rjpalmer_newrex_001.jpg?format=2500w


Good comparison image screenshotted from the Youtube video 'Jurassic Park T-Rex - Is it Accurate?// Bonus content with Dr. Thomas Carr// CREATURE REVIEW':

https://i.imgur.com/DiDYBOT.jpg


Good skeletal that incorporates the gastralia on Sue:

https://www.deviantart.com/scotthartman/art/A-T-rex-named-Sue-3-0-124138016

[ITdactyl]

Thanks for the link to the Ilya Yungin Rex @Ravonium.  Somehow, that flew under my radar.

Back on topic, I hope CollectA retires their -relatively- old Hatzegopteryx (and release and updated model).

[Concavenator]

So what would I retire if I was in charge of these companies...here we go:

CollectA: I would retire the "Standard Line" as it is,these smaller,lower end models.
If I was CollectA,I would introduce less models in a year,but all being Deluxes (that's what the mightiest CollectA figures are,after all,i.e Tyrannosaurus,Spinosaurus, Guidraco, Carcharodontosaurus...).And I would build the dinosaur line around the Deluxe one.

Not to mention that the earliest models I would accept now are,as I have read,from 2010 and only a few.Anything from before must go in my opinion.

Safari:
Guanlong ( do they still sell this one?)
2011 featherless Tyrannosaurus
Apatosaurus
Edmontosaurus
2017 Diplodocus
Mosasaurus

(Can't think of any more  )

Papo: this one is tougher than the others,because all the sculpts have several scientific accuracy issues,but in any case,these are the ones that need better sculpts and that I would retire:

All of their Tyrannosaurus
Spinosaurus
Triceratops
Stegosaurus
Velociraptor

And I would bring back the recently retired Archaeopteryx and Tupuxuara.

Schleich: Possibly all the line except their upcoming Spinosaurus and their 2015 Kentrosaurus.

I think companies should realise that they could get rid off their worse models and ivest the money put on the production of these models and do some better new ones,if possible.Amyways,it would be intelligent to retire these figures anyways,because they probably aren't selling very well at this point.For instance,I doubt that a CollectA Herrerasaurus is selling very well now in 2018/19 ( I've randomly chosen this figure,but I think you guys will get the point  ).

[tanystropheus]

Why would anyone want any model retired, unless retiring it guarantees something better comes along? It just makes everything harder to get. No matter how hideous a model is, someone somewhere will probably want it. Unless the model is somehow an anti-science statement or something.

How about the Schleich Ceratosaurus?

On a more serious note, the sort of thing I mean is the Rebor "Yutyrannus" - that is anti-science.

Yes, I agree. However, the 1993 quadrupedal Schleich Ceratosaurus (the one that is fashioned to look like an anthropomorphic dung entity) could theoretically be interpreted as being anti-science, no?

[Shonisaurus]

What I do not understand is how they keep Schleich's barapasaurus considering that it is a rather expensive figure. I do not think it has much acceptance among the market even among children not only because of its price but because it is not elaborated like other sauropods by that brand that with its defects far surpass this rare sauropod.

I believe that they are waiting to sell all the stocks of barapasaurus in order to amortize Schleich's economic losses.

I as a consecrated and complete collector have to admit that I bought it but honestly I do not recommend it to anyone who wants to have dinosaurs of the highest order of the Schleich brand, I recommend the pentaceratops, psittacosaurus, oviraptor, dinogorgon, tyrannosaurus (adult and juvenile) of 2018 , triceratops version 2018 or kentrosaurus both versions (the discontinued as the one in force) before that sauropod, Schleich brachiosaurus and apatosaurus made many years before this figure are even better.

[Gothmog the Baryonyx]

Why would anyone want any model retired, unless retiring it guarantees something better comes along? It just makes everything harder to get. No matter how hideous a model is, someone somewhere will probably want it. Unless the model is somehow an anti-science statement or something.

How about the Schleich Ceratosaurus?

On a more serious note, the sort of thing I mean is the Rebor "Yutyrannus" - that is anti-science.

Yes, I agree. However, the 1993 quadrupedal Schleich Ceratosaurus (the one that is fashioned to look like an anthropomorphic dung entity) could theoretically be interpreted as being anti-science, no?

Oh, that mutant is from 2007 too apparently, well it seems your right, that is anti-science as it looks like they tried to make it look as little like a Ceratosaurus as they could.